Llorente vs CA
GR 124371
November 23, 2000
Lessons Applicable: Divorce
Laws Applicable: Art.
15, Art. 17, Art. 26 FC
FACTS:
Alicia( 2nd wife) ß Lorenzo N. Llorente --- Paula (1ST
wife) --- Ceferino Llorente (brother)
Crisologo Llorente(son)
- Lorenzo N. Llorente was an enlisted
serviceman of the United States Navy from March 10, 1927 to September 30,
1957
- February 22, 1937: Lorenzo and Paula
Llorente were married before a parish priest, Roman Catholic Church, in
Nabua, Camarines Sur
- Before the outbreak of the Pacific War,
Lorenzo departed for the United States and Paula stayed in the conjugal
home
- November 30, 1943: Lorenzo was admitted
to United States citizenship and Certificate of Naturalization
- 1945: When Lorenzo was granted an accrued
leave to visit his wife and he visited the Philippines, He discovered that his wife Paula was
pregnant and was “living in” and having an adulterous relationship with
his brother, Ceferino Llorente
- December 4, 1945: Paula gave birth to a
boy registered in the Office of the Registrar of Nabua as Crisologo
Llorente with the certificate stating that the child was not legitimate
and the line for the father’s name was left blank
- Lorenzo refused to forgive Paula and
live with her
- February 2, 1946: the couple drew and
signed a written agreement which was witnessed by Paula’s father and
stepmother to the effect that
1.
all the
family allowances allotted by the United States Navy as part of Lorenzo’s
salary and all other obligations for Paula’s daily maintenance and support
would be suspended
2.
they
would dissolve their marital union in accordance with judicial proceedings
3.
they
would make a separate agreement regarding their conjugal property acquired
during their marital life; and
4.
Lorenzo
would not prosecute Paula for her adulterous act since she voluntarily admitted
her fault and agreed to separate from Lorenzo peacefully.
- November 16, 1951: Lorenzo returned and
filed for divorce with the Superior Court of the State of California in
and for the County of San Diego
- December 4, 1952: the divorce decree
became final
- January 16, 1958: Lorenzo married Alicia
F. Llorente in Manila and lived together as husband and wife and bore 3
children: Raul, Luz and Beverly, all surnamed Llorente
- March 13, 1981: Lorenzo executed a Last
Will and Testament where he bequeathed all his property to Alicia and
their three children
- December 14, 1983: Lorenzo filed with the
RTC, Iriga, Camarines Sur, a petition for the probate and allowance of his
last will and testament wherein Lorenzo moved that Alicia be appointed
Special Administratrix of his estate
- January 18, 1984: RTC denied the motion
for the reason that the Lorenzo was still alive
- January 24, 1984: RTC admitted finding
that the will was duly executedthe will to probate
- June 11, 1985: before the proceedings
could be terminated, Lorenzo died
- RTC on the petition for letters of
administration filed by Paula over Lorenzo’s estate contending that she
was the surviving spouse and WITHOUT terminating the testate proceedings filed by Alicia, gave
due course to Paula’s petition
- divorce decree granted to the late
Lorenzo Llorente is void and inapplicable in the Philippines, therefore
the marriage he contracted with Alicia Fortunato at Manila is void
- Paula T. Llorente: 1/3 estate and ½ conjugal
estate
- illegitimate children, Raul, Luz and
Beverly: 1/3 estate
- RTC denied Alicia’s motion for
reconsideration but modified that Raul and Luz Llorente are not children
“legitimate or otherwise” of Lorenzo since they were not legally adopted
by him thus, Beverly Llorente as the only illegitimate child of Lorenzo,
entitles her to 1/3 of the estate and one-third (1/3) of the free portion
of the estate
- CA: Affirmed with modification
ISSUE: W/N the
divorce is valid and proven
HELD: YES. Petition
is GRANTED. REVERSES the decision of the Regional Trial Court and RECOGNIZES as
VALID the decree of divorce granted in favor of the deceased Lorenzo N.
Llorente by the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County
of San Diego, made final on December 4, 1952. REMANDS the cases to the court of
origin for determination of the intrinsic validity of Lorenzo N. Llorente’s
will and determination of the parties’ successional rights allowing proof of
foreign law with instructions that the trial court shall proceed with all
deliberate dispatch to settle the estate of the deceased within the framework
of the Rules of Court.
- Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr.:
o nationality principle in Article 15 of the
Civil Code, only Philippine nationals are covered by the policy against
absolute divorces, the same being considered contrary to our concept of public
policy and morality
o Court ruled that aliens may obtain divorces
abroad, provided they are valid according to their national law
- Quita v. Court of Appeals:
o
once proven
that NO longer a Filipino citizen when he obtained the divorce, the ruling in
Van Dorn would become applicable
- Divorce of Lorenzo H. Llorente from his
first wife Paula was valid and recognized in this jurisdiction as a matter
of comity. Now, the effects of this
divorce (as to the succession to the estate of the decedent) are matters
best left to the determination of the trial court.
- The clear intent of Lorenzo to bequeath
his property to his second wife and children by her is glaringly shown in
the will he executed. We do not
wish to frustrate his wishes, since he was a foreigner, not covered by our
laws on “family rights and duties, status, condition and legal capacity.
- Whether the will is intrinsically valid
and who shall inherit from Lorenzo are issues best proved by foreign law
which must be pleaded and proved.
- Whether the will was executed in
accordance with the formalities required is answered by referring to
Philippine law. In fact, the will
was duly probated.